4 ms·

To balance what out, exactly?

sintaxi 9y ago
Read the class action lawsuit recently filed against Google by James Damore. That at least in part answers this question. Also check out Project Veritas. edit: made more specific.
- ravitation 9y ago
  For those reading, be aware of the hilarious bias of Project Veritas...
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > Read the class action lawsuit recently filed against Google. Depending on your definition of “recently”, I can think of at least three, none of which seem on point (though the UK one about data collection might be arguably connectable to an argument about a need for anti-trust action.)
  - sintaxi 9y ago
    Thanks for pointing that out. Updated the post to be more specific.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      Well, you sepcified which lawsuit (and it was one of the three recent ones I had in mind), but not how it is in any way germane to a need for anti-trust action.
      - sintaxi 9y ago
        I actually wouldn't advocate for anti-trust action, I'm just pointing where there is perceived imbalance caused by the dominance these tech companies have.
        dragonwriter 9y ago
        > I actually wouldn't advocate for anti-trust action You literally just did by using the case to answer a question about the need for anti-trust action. > I'm just pointing where there is perceived imbalance caused by the dominance these tech companies have. But the case doesn't support that; it supports (taking its allegations—many of which are diametrically opposed to those in the other recent employment discrimination class-action against Google—as true for the sake of argument) a claim of an imbalance within Google, but not the existence of an imbalance in society caused by Google (whether through its dominance in some areas or otherwise.)
        bentruyman 9y ago
        Yeah, I don’t think Damore has anything to do with the topic of the wider thread, or anti-trust for that matter.
        sintaxi 9y ago
        The law isn't the only way to solve this problem. Just because I agree there is a problem doesn't mean I must support the blunt force of legislation to fix it. It stands to reason that outward imbalance begins with inward imbalance and pointing to bias within the company culture is relevant when it comes to validating why there might be an outward imbalance in how their products are run. Again, I'm responding to someone asking "what needs balance". If you don't agree with me it might be more useful to provide a more compelling opinion instead of picking my words apart.
lgleason 9y ago
With Google, for example, right now they have a pseudo monopoly in search with 80% world wide market share. With that kind of power, it is very easy to manipulate search results to control what people see which can have a profound affect on society, elections, etc..
- bentruyman 9y ago
  And “anti-trust action” fixes this how? We’re going to start having government come in and tell Google what is acceptable content?

Read the class action lawsuit recently filed against Google by James Damore. That at least in part answers this question. Also check out Project Veritas. edit: made more specific.

ravitation 9y ago
For those reading, be aware of the hilarious bias of Project Veritas...
dragonwriter 9y ago
> Read the class action lawsuit recently filed against Google. Depending on your definition of “recently”, I can think of at least three, none of which seem on point (though the UK one about data collection might be arguably connectable to an argument about a need for anti-trust action.)
- sintaxi 9y ago
  Thanks for pointing that out. Updated the post to be more specific.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    Well, you sepcified which lawsuit (and it was one of the three recent ones I had in mind), but not how it is in any way germane to a need for anti-trust action.
    - sintaxi 9y ago
      I actually wouldn't advocate for anti-trust action, I'm just pointing where there is perceived imbalance caused by the dominance these tech companies have.
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
        > I actually wouldn't advocate for anti-trust action You literally just did by using the case to answer a question about the need for anti-trust action. > I'm just pointing where there is perceived imbalance caused by the dominance these tech companies have. But the case doesn't support that; it supports (taking its allegations—many of which are diametrically opposed to those in the other recent employment discrimination class-action against Google—as true for the sake of argument) a claim of an imbalance within Google, but not the existence of an imbalance in society caused by Google (whether through its dominance in some areas or otherwise.)
        bentruyman 9y ago
        Yeah, I don’t think Damore has anything to do with the topic of the wider thread, or anti-trust for that matter.
        sintaxi 9y ago
        The law isn't the only way to solve this problem. Just because I agree there is a problem doesn't mean I must support the blunt force of legislation to fix it. It stands to reason that outward imbalance begins with inward imbalance and pointing to bias within the company culture is relevant when it comes to validating why there might be an outward imbalance in how their products are run. Again, I'm responding to someone asking "what needs balance". If you don't agree with me it might be more useful to provide a more compelling opinion instead of picking my words apart.

lgleason 9y ago

With Google, for example, right now they have a pseudo monopoly in search with 80% world wide market share. With that kind of power, it is very easy to manipulate search results to control what people see which can have a profound affect on society, elections, etc..

bentruyman 9y ago
And “anti-trust action” fixes this how? We’re going to start having government come in and tell Google what is acceptable content?